Review -- Neuromancer by William Gibson

William Gibson's Neuromancer felt more like an experience than anything else. I'm not even sure what that sentence means. For me, it became one of those rare, strange pieces of literature where I can appreciate its artistic merit, but not actually enjoy it. Read on to see if I can even attempt to explain what I mean.
Let's start with the basics. Neuromancer is a cyberpunk novel published in 1984. It's considered a seminal work in the genre, and I can see why. The novel felt like the print version of Blade Runner, which of course is an adaptation of Philip K. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Blade Runner came out in 1982 while Gibson was working on Neuromancer, and he was afraid that people would think he just copied things from it. I think that both works share similarities because they have that je ne sais quoi "capturing the Zeitgeist flair" about them.


The novel tells the story of Henry Dorsett Case (I don't remember ever seeing his full name in the novel; he's always called Case) a washed-up computer hacker who is hired by a shadowy man named Armitage to pull off the biggest hack ever. That's basically it, but it gets more complicated with the introduction of two different AIs and their own plans, the sociopath Riviera and his holographic abilities, and the inbred Tessier-Ashpool family living in the hive-like Villa Straylight. To be honest, I finished the book feeling like I was missing something. But it wasn't one of those "good" missing something feelings. It was more along the lines of: "I'm confused, but I feel like I shouldn't be. I'm a diligent reader, so why do I feel this way?"


Issues with plot aside, my biggest complaint with this book is the characters. All of the supporting characters are more interesting than the main character. Case felt really one note to me. He gets swept along with the plot, but never really develops his own agency. The only character trait he has is the fact that he's a junkie: a connoisseur of amphetamines and the like. Molly, the Razorgirl, is far more mysterious. Riviera with his sociopathic tendencies and strange abilities, is far stranger. Reading sections from their point of view would have been far more enjoyable, at least for me.


The reason I said that this book felt more like an "experience" comes from Gibson's world building. Again, I feel that it suffers from the maladies as Case's character. There are things mentioned, almost as throwaway lines, that are way more intriguing than the things we are actually shown. The Sprawl. The fact that there are hints that certain places in Europe might have been hit with atomic bombs. The space station named Freeside. All of these things sound so cool, but we only get small tastes. I don't know if this is a 1980's sci-fi aesthetic or something that's part of Gibson's particular style, but it just wasn't for me.


This next observation comes from the fact that I read the novel for the first time over 20 years after it was originally published, but the entire thing just felt like the 80s. Do you know what I mean? The jargon, the representations of cyberspace, the world view. It felt like peering into a literary time capsule. If Gibson had attempted to write this novel in 2010, I guarantee it would have a different flavor.


Neuromancer is a "triple crown" winner--the Nebula Award, Philip K. Dick Award, and the Hugo Award. I believe it deserves those prizes. There is merit here. The book shaped the cyberpunk genre in a way that cornerstone texts do. However, for me, its minimalist style, lackluster main character, and a slightly muddled, philosophical plot didn't enthrall me. By all means, I invite you to "jack in" to Neuromancer and make your own conclusions. If you're curious about cyberpunk, this might be both a good and a bad place to start.